Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush: US would defend Israel against Iran
Reuters.com ^ | 02/01/2006 | Steve Holland

Posted on 02/01/2006 10:45:07 AM PST by GeneD

NASHVILLE, Tennessee (Reuters) - President George W. Bush vowed on Wednesday the United States will rise to Israel's defense if needed against Iran and denounced Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for "menacing talk" against Israel.

In a Reuters interview aboard Air Force One en route to Nashville, Bush also said he saw a "very good chance" that the governing board of the International Atomic Energy Agency will refer Iran to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions.

"I am concerned about a person that, one, tries to rewrite the history of the Holocaust, and two, has made it clear that his intentions are to destroy Israel," Bush said.

"Israel is a solid ally of the United States, we will rise to Israel's defense if need be. So this kind of menacing talk is disturbing. It's not only disturbing to the United States, it's disturbing for other countries in the world as well," he added.

Asked if he meant the United States would rise to Israel's defense militarily, Bush said: "You bet, we'll defend Israel."

Ahmadinejad has prompted international condemnation for anti-Israel rhetoric in recent weeks, including saying it should be wiped off the map, and also calling into question the Holocaust.

Iran is engaged in a stand-off over its nuclear program. Tehran insists its program is aimed at developing nuclear power and the United States and other international powers charge it is seeking to develop nuclear weapons.

Asked if he thought the IAEA will refer Iran to the Security Council, Bush said: "The IAEA must take a look at the facts, and listen carefully to the arguments, and there's a very good chance it will."

The council's five permanent members, including a reluctant Russia and China, this week agreed to ask the U.N. nuclear watchdog to report Iran to New York immediately.

Bush also said he had spoken to Russian President Vladimir Putin about Iran and would not say how Putin feels about a Security Council referral. "He understands the threat, and we share the same goal," he said.

The IAEA's governing board will decide at an emergency meeting in Vienna on Thursday whether to report Iran to the Security Council.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; Israel; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: allyisrael; bush; ezekiel38; ezekiel39; iran; irannukes; israel; usa
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-111 next last
To: Emmet Fitzhume
"God is with Israel.
Satan is with Iran, and everyone knows it."

How right you are.

Islam is nothing by the work of Satan. We are in a battle of good vs. evil which will never go away so long as Islam is allowed to spread like the plague that it is.
41 posted on 02/01/2006 11:27:56 AM PST by WashingtonStateRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: brownsfan
I grew up in the cold war. Mutual Assured Destruction was the order of the day. We thought of nukes, but there was an undertone. Russia for all her faults was led by rational people. And we had no desire to let the nuke genie back out of the bottle. Iran and muslims are different. They are stone age animals who would take extreme pleasure in the carnage created by a nuclear explosion. muslims are raised different, they think differently, and have different sensibilities. The radical part of islam is as evil as evil can be. I regret to say I firmly believe that in our lifetime, we will see these animals succeed in detonating a nuclear device somewhere in the civilized world.

Here's where we really need that NEUTRON bomb that Jimmy Carter didn't like; kills people, doesn't break stuff or make it glow in the dark.

42 posted on 02/01/2006 11:28:22 AM PST by jdsteel (Go Steelers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv; Do not dub me shapka broham

ping for standing with your best ME ally.


43 posted on 02/01/2006 11:31:36 AM PST by dervish (Hamastan " the step-child of Iran and the Taliban")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeWUSAF
Anyone pickup on when he spoke "directly to the people of Iran" last night in his State of the Union address?

My wife said "he just threatened Iran". Yes, he did.

44 posted on 02/01/2006 11:35:32 AM PST by ARealMothersSonForever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: VaBthang4
Yep...all the Loserdopians'll start screaming about the USS Liberty etc, etc.

Hi, VaG. What do loserdopians have to do with the USS Liberty or Pat Buchanan for that matter?

45 posted on 02/01/2006 11:39:23 AM PST by jmc813 (John Shadegg for Majority Leader)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: GeneD

Dear Mr President:

Thousands of Israeli men, women and toddlers were not murdered in recent years directly by Iran.

They were murdered by the allies, friends and colleagues of a man you honored and praised in the White House.

You were the first sitting President to call for the birth of a terrorist state at Israel's throat. A terrorist state that will now be ruled by Islamic fanatics identical to and allied with Al Quida and Iran.

Cheap talk about Iran, Mr President. Reminds we of Bill Clinton's vow to man an Israeli foxhole.

Sincerely,



46 posted on 02/01/2006 11:46:14 AM PST by Sabramerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dervish
Bush also said he saw a "very good chance" that the governing board of the International Atomic Energy Agency will refer Iran to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions.
Of course, the French have already said there won't be any sanctions...
47 posted on 02/01/2006 11:54:56 AM PST by SunkenCiv (In the long run, there is only the short run.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: pissant; GeneD

<< Won't need to. Israel can handle Iran. >>

Spot on.

Israel would defend America against Iran!


48 posted on 02/01/2006 11:54:57 AM PST by Brian Allen (How arrogant are we to believe our career political-power-lusting lumpen somehow superior to theirs?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Brian Allen

I think GWB has been making the mullahs a little bit uncomfortable, since he and Condi have taken over the steering wheel from the euroweenies.


49 posted on 02/01/2006 11:58:04 AM PST by pissant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: GeneD

It's refreshing to have total White House clarity on some issues.


50 posted on 02/01/2006 12:01:07 PM PST by RightWhale (pas de lieu, Rhone que nous)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #51 Removed by Moderator

To: Husker8877

It was an obvious typo.

Still the Bush does no wrong crowd is quick with the vitriol against anyone who sees the man and his flaws without blinders.


52 posted on 02/01/2006 12:05:47 PM PST by Sabramerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Brian Allen

"Isreal would defend America against Iran"

Would they? I mean really? Do you think they would? Could they? is a better question I think. I think that any war agianst Isreal is a war against the U.S., but a war against the U.S. isn't neccesarily a war against Isreal...just IMHO


53 posted on 02/01/2006 12:09:47 PM PST by groovejedi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: tomahawk

"It's hard to defend a country that has been wiped off the map in a nuke strike."

No kidding. It may be "avenge" instead of "defend" if this situation continues to develop the way it is now.


54 posted on 02/01/2006 12:11:34 PM PST by Big Red Clay (Greetings from the Big Red State)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Sabramerican; Darksheare; meowmeow; 4mycountry; Poohbah; Grampa Dave; an amused spectator; ...
*Ahem*

Wanna lookie here?

55 posted on 02/01/2006 12:12:58 PM PST by Zavien Doombringer (13th AF, 3rd TFW, 3rd AGS, 3rd AMU - ESC The Blue Screw will get you too! 86-89)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Sabramerican

OTOH the Palestinians do not represent an existential threat to Israel tragic and serious as the terror was. The solution was well within Israel's hands and borders to control. And in fact Israel ended Intifada 2 when they struck back beginning with Operation Defensive Shield after the Passover Massacre.

American policy under Pres Bush reflected the desires of most Israelis including its leadership. Like it or not the reality is that PM Sharon called for separation and a Palestinian State. You can't be more Catholic than the Pope.

My own gut feeling is that PM Sharon and others sought to get the Palestinians out of the way before the more serious issue of Iran comes to the fore. That moment is rapidly approaching.

Now that Hamas has been elected many say it is a reflection of the mistake of disengagement. Wrong. It is a reflection that Arafat died and the stranglehold on Palestinians was relaxed. The election of Hamas provides some advantages to Israel chiefly that Hamas is tied to the global Jihad movement which means that the world, not just Israel, may be interested in their curtailment. In terms of parochial interests, terror and seeking the destruction of Israel, Fatah and Hamas are indistinguishable. The Europeans and leftists of all nationalities and stripes, including Israelis, were able to convince themselves in the face of obvious contradictory evidence that Fatah was interested in coexistence. The same will occur with Hamas at a lightening speed pace.

I would only expect European attitudes to change if they make the global connection. Hamas is part of the Muslim Brotherhood. The Brotherhood is the seed group for Al Qaeda, Zawahiri's starting point.

Daniel Pipes has an excellent article on the Hamas election:

http://www.nysun.com/pf.php?id=26722


56 posted on 02/01/2006 12:32:39 PM PST by dervish (Hamastan " the step-child of Iran and the Taliban")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: GeneD; SJackson; yonif; Simcha7; American in Israel; Slings and Arrows; judicial meanz; ...
""You bet, we'll defend Israel.""

America and Israel -- allies against the WORLD










If you'd like to be on or off this
Christian Supporters of Israel ping list,
please FR mail me ~
  -  -
MikeFromFR ~
There failed not ought of any good thing which the LORD had
spoken unto the house of Israel; all came to pass. (Joshua 21:45)

Letter To The President In Support Of Israel ~
'Final Solution,' Phase 2 ~
Warnings ~



The future of Arab controlled Gaza.

"Palestine is the wrong name for their State. It should be called Anarchy."—FReeper sgtbono2002
"Then let's wait and see what the Arabs do after they take Gaza. There's nothing like Arab reality to break up a Jewish fantasy."—FReeper Noachian
A student told his professor he was going to "Palestine" to "fight for freedom, peace and justice,"—Orwellian leftist code words that mean "murder Jews."
The Nature Of Bruce ~

57 posted on 02/01/2006 12:34:37 PM PST by Salem (FREE REPUBLIC - Fighting to win within the Arena of the War of Ideas! So get in the fight!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sabramerican

And what of teh vitriol of teh Bush can do nothing right crowd?
They will always find SOMETHING to whine about so they can be as unhappy as they are determined to be.


58 posted on 02/01/2006 12:36:08 PM PST by Darksheare (And baby says "RAAAAR!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Semper Paratus; GeneD
Need a similar declaration that Kennedy gave during the Cuban Missile Crisis. "Any atomic attack on Israel will be seen as an attack on the US by Iran requiring a full retaliatory strike".

Israel is more than capable of taking care of herself.

The only real question is preemption. Preemption when and preemption how. Tactical attacks will solve nothing. Unfortunate as it is, the only way to preempt Iran would be the use of tactical nukes since tactical conventional attacks would never preempt Iran's desire or ability to "wipe Israel off the map". Nukes used in anger are at their greatest threat since the 1973 Arab-Israeli war when Israel had the ability to destroy the surrounded Egyptian Army and the Soviets threatened nuclear attack.

Iran's size, the distance from Israel and the large number of dispersed assets make it impossible for Israel to attack Iran--conventionally--and put an end to Iran's threats.

Nuclear threats could well be answered by nuclear preemption.

59 posted on 02/01/2006 12:40:29 PM PST by Dont_Tread_On_Me_888 (Bush's #1 priority Africa. #2 priority appease Fox and Mexico . . . USA priority #64.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: dervish

Sharon was responding to the Saudi Plan and the "Road Map".

Even as wrong as Sharon was, which recent events have just begun to prove, his plan was contingent on a Bush promise to recognize certain Israeli positions including vis a vis the "West Bank". Promises now disavowed by the Administration.

If you don't believe Hamas to the East and West and Hazballah to the North, is an existential threat to Israel- especially when Islamics make inroads in Jordan and Egypt- wait and see.


60 posted on 02/01/2006 12:43:22 PM PST by Sabramerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-111 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson